• chuckleslord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 months ago

      I mean, that’s a kind of shitty take. The point they’re making, that IP hoarding is making streaming fuck awful, is correct. They had a time in the recent past where that wasn’t the case and were trying to make an argument for why that should be again.

      Content being centralized doesn’t require a monopoly, it requires the separation between streaming services and IP creators (like early Netflix). That would disincentivize the IP hoarding without requiring a monopoly.

      Ya know, like movie theaters or video rental stores (when those existed). By allowing for vertical integration, you get Disney Movie Theaters, which only show Disney movies, and that blows (which is why any IP streaming service blows). Movie theaters, instead, show every movie coming out right now and that’s how streaming services should be. That way, the only way to compete is with app quality and price. Ya know, things customers actually give a fuck about.

      • uranibaba@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        I understand that the first person didn’t want a media monopoly, but your explanation and examples with movie theaters and rental stores really made the difference clear.

      • xenoclast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I think there are a ton of valid arguments that they have far too much control of the music streaming market. At least enough power to affect the licensing costs and artist incomes.

        There have been more than a few anti trust claims made against them.

        Do I think they’re too big and have an outsized influence? Yes. Definitely.

        At the moment at lot of what they’ve done have benefited consumers though, but that doesn’t mean that will always be true.

        Never trust a profit driven business to work in your best interest.

    • thepreciousboar
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Streaming services should compete on quality of the platform, pricing and features, not exclusives. If every tv series and movie were available on every platforms, prices would drop and quality would increase, as the platforms try and be the best, it’s the contrary of monopoly because people can freely choose. Now they don’t care about being the best, they try and get exclusive rights for something you like watching so you have no other (legal) way to do it, right now it’s already a monopoly, a segregated one, but still a monopoly, because you have no choice.

      • xenoclast@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Why on earth would capitalist companies do that though? That would guarantee most companies would not realize shareholder value.

        Who gives a shit what they do? Piracy has never been easier or better than it is right now. Instead of being annoyed at their stupidity start teaching people you know how to use vpns and torrents.

        Media companies used to be terrified of torrents. Now they don’t care anymore. It would nice to get that back

        • thepreciousboar
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          How much money does Netflix spend on trash series just to hope to get some exclusive? And how much money does Paramount+ spend on a broken platform full of issues?

          Maybe if netflix spent those money on acquiring more IP, and producers like Paramount gave their IP to different streaming, they would make more money? I don’t have an answer to this question because it’s of course very complicated, what I’m saying is it doesn’t have to be like this.

          How platforms are now is after a continuous growth over half a decade, it’s probably not sistainable to keep the same price with the same business model, so somwthing will have to change eventually

          • xenoclast@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            I’m not criticizing your rationale or anything. I’m just trying to get across how far from what you think things “should” be like and how they really are.

            Imagine the infuriating arguments you have with boomer/geriatric family at Thanksgiving. except they’re in charge and have all the money and you’re constantly fighting their shortsighted thinking, racist bias, greed and ignorance…

            That’s how decisions are made for these platforms.

            We’re absolutely going ro see more and more ads on for-pay platforms because one of these geriatric greed monsters saw that another of their cohort made their hoard bigger last quarter so now they want that. Like a toddler who failed the marshmallow test. They don’t about your arguments. They have all the money so their clearly know much more than you.

            I certainly won’t claim special insider knowledge as some anon on the Internet… but if you knew someone in the Industry you’d get similar stories.